NAZIR AHMAD NAIKOO Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER submits that he was constrained to file this petition on the count that an advertisement notice came to be issued by the respondents on 20 -12 -1993, wherein applications for the post of Prosecuting Officers were invited from the citizens of the State. Besides other conditions and stipulations in the advertisement -notice, it was also stipulated that the age as on 1ts day of January, 1994 of the candidate must not be more than 30 years and not less than 18 years etc. etc.

(2.) PETITIONER further submits that in the said avertisement notice, cut off date for determination of age as shown 01 -01 -1994 is not in accordance with SRO 19 dated 25 -12 -1982, wherein it is provided that the minimum and maximum age shall be observed with reference to first day of January in which the advertisement notice for the post is issued. The said SRO reads:

(3.) LD . counsel submits that the notification for the post of Prosecuting Officer was issued on 20 -12 -1993 and as per said SRO referred to hereinabove, the notification should have indicated that the age as on 1st January 1993 and not age as on 01 -01 -1994. In that view of the matter, by issuing a wrong notification the petitioner has been declared to be age barred by two days, which is not the correct interpretation given by the respondents and obviously so on the basis of having issued a wrong notification regarding fixation of age as per Article 37 of the Civil Service Regulations and is not in accordance with SRO 19 CSR dated 25 -01 -1982.